Hmmm
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| lcafiero Jun 18, 2010 2:21 PM EDT |
I would have thought this story would have generated some discussion. Not only that, I suited up in my Nomex and other fireproof clothing in preparation for the possible flaming that might occur as a result of this discussion. Nonetheless, Joe is right in this article, and to see some of the replies by some FSF supporters to the article -- the usual rigid, dogmatic, "with-us-or-against-us" kind -- reinforces the trend toward marginalization that hamstrings this vital and necessary organization (of which I am a member, incidentally -- No. 5030 to be exact). To think that pointing out shortcomings (as Joe does) and offering alternatives are "opposition" is painfully myopic. I would like to think that the leadership of the organization would be a little more receptive to these observations, but sadly I'm not terribly confident. |
| tuxchick Jun 18, 2010 2:37 PM EDT |
Perhaps the FSF is not very high on user's radar these days. You and Joe are right, it's not enough to just say no no no, you have to offer some good alternatives. That's my main beef with the FSF. I like their strong stance on software freedom and unwillingness to water down the core principle of software freedom. But being "the party of Gno" isn't very effective. |
| gus3 Jun 18, 2010 2:46 PM EDT |
Quoting:it's not enough to just say no no no, you have to offer some good alternatives.When the idea is broken by design (elevated privileges in ActiveX, anyone?), "no" is the only good alternative. |
| azerthoth Jun 18, 2010 6:41 PM EDT |
That pretty much sums up the ActiveFSF too, broken by design. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!